Issues with your account? Bug us in the Discord!

Vivendi strikes again

If you llive in Europe and like to trade digital media watch out for what may be comming.

"The directive, being pushed through by Janelly Fourtou, MEP (whose husband happens to run the Vivendi media empire), could prove even more draconian than the US Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA)."


[url]http://www.globalsecurity.org/org/news/2004/040302-ricin.htm[/url]

Comments

  • WORFWORF The Burninator
    I guess with the risk of being arrested for thinking about a piece of music means its time to leave Europe.

    Worf
  • BigglesBiggles <font color=#AAFFAA>The Man Without a Face</font>
    Yay for living in still ignorant NZ. :D
  • WORFWORF The Burninator
    [QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Biggles [/i]
    [B]Yay for living in still ignorant NZ. :D [/B][/QUOTE]

    Got a spare bed?

    Worf
  • BigglesBiggles <font color=#AAFFAA>The Man Without a Face</font>
    There's a spare bedroom downstairs. :D
  • E.TE.T Quote-o-matic
    I haven't never liked this New Soviet Uni... European union. :angryv:
    And this is just one reason more to hate it.

    This directive is caused not only Brussel's invertebrate greedy bastards.
    RIAA and MPAA and others has been bashing for this legislation in Europe.
    Now we would just need more those kamikazes to blow few "nests of corruption".
  • C_MonC_Mon A Genuine Sucker
    Stupid!
  • ShadowDancerShadowDancer When I say, "Why aye, gadgie," in my heart I say, "Och aye, laddie." London, UK
    personally i hate europe! brussels wants all the power for itself with semingly no regard for the interests of the member states. i wish the UK would just hurry up and leave.

    "if early man had know that someday politicians would come out of the gene pool, they'da stayed in the trees and written evolution off as a bad idea!" - John Sheridan

    i think its time to maybe add lawyers to that
  • BigglesBiggles <font color=#AAFFAA>The Man Without a Face</font>
    The concept of the european union is a good one. The problem is that what they have actually created is a way for large companies to enforce what they want over a bunch of countries all at the same time.
  • [QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Biggles [/i]
    [B]The concept of the european union is a good one. The problem is that what they have actually created is a way for large companies to enforce what they want over a bunch of countries all at the same time. [/B][/QUOTE]

    A European Union, I support, but a [b]FEDERAL[/b] Europe, inevitably dominated by France and Germany, I do [i]not[/i].

    Regards,
    Morden
  • E.TE.T Quote-o-matic
    [QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Biggles [/i]
    [B]The concept of the european union is a good one.[/B][/QUOTE]
    Idea is good but implementation really sucks.
    (and is going worse)
  • BigglesBiggles <font color=#AAFFAA>The Man Without a Face</font>
    From what I can tell it's too much about small power bases controlling all of europe for the good of themselves and the corporations who give them money, rather than all of europe controlling all of europe for the good of all of europe.
  • TyvarTyvar Next best thing to a St. Bernard
    Id like to welcome my european brothers to the federalism debates that weve been having here since about 1783, and the little guys have been loosing. :(

    I hope you in europe learn from our example and jump up and down on brussells before it becomes like the american federal government.

    Biggles: small powerbases dominate on all level from local to global, its part of human nature unfortunatly.
  • E.TE.T Quote-o-matic
    [QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Biggles [/i]
    [B]From what I can tell it's too much about small power bases controlling all of europe for the good of themselves and the corporations who give them money, rather than all of europe controlling all of europe for the good of all of europe. [/B][/QUOTE]
    That's the summary from ideology of free globalization and capitalism.
    :angryv:
  • E.TE.T Quote-o-matic
    Everyone here and fast!
    [url]http://action.eff.org/action/index.asp?step=2&item=2873[/url]
  • [QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Tyvar [/i]
    [B]I hope you in europe learn from our example and jump up and down on brussells before it becomes like the american federal government. [/B][/QUOTE]

    Yet there's something more reassuring in being an American, and being govered by another American, rather than being British, and being governed by someone from another country.

    Regards,
    Morden
  • BekennBekenn Sinclair's Duck
    True, but I imagine it was a bit more difficult back when people thought of themselves in terms of which colony/state they were from first and in terms of the union second. Hatred of the British empire helped at the start, but it wasn't until after the civil war that this country began to feel like a unified whole.

    So: How long do you think it'll be before Europeans think of themselves as European first and British/French/Italian/Finnish (can't forget Finnish) second?

    And if that doesn't sound like an appealing idea to you, then congrats, you're an anti-federalist.
  • *sigh* we really should have collected money to buy that aircraft carrier thing....
  • TyvarTyvar Next best thing to a St. Bernard
    Sorry Becken, I may be an american, but it does indeed make me nautious that if it wasnt for the senate about 15 states would call the shots in this country.

    there are alot more cultural devides in this country then people think, its not as "unified" as the media (which is based in California and New York) would have you think.

    And yes that is just in considering white anglo saxon protestants. In fact if it wasnt for the senate this country would probably have broken up long ago.
  • I don't really see a problem in a federal system as long as power is distributed and checked by means of a senate or other bodies that give equal power to all states regardless of status.

    Europeans need to make sure that they are not guradualy brought in to a system that has little public accountability, and large centralized control.

    Back to topic....
    What do you guys think should actualy be considered as copyright infringment? For me it would be only passing someone elses work as your own, or profiting from it without permission. I just don't think information, and ideas can be classified as property, which is what these companies claim.
  • BekennBekenn Sinclair's Duck
    [QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Tyvar [/i]
    [B]Sorry Becken, I may be an american, but it does indeed make me nautious that if it wasnt for the senate about 15 states would call the shots in this country.[/B][/QUOTE]

    Never said otherwise. And spell my name right next time! [b][i]* FWAPP *[/i][/b]

    [QUOTE][B] there are alot more cultural devides in this country then people think, its not as "unified" as the media (which is based in California and New York) would have you think.[/B][/QUOTE]

    Once again, I didn't mean to suggest that that wasn't the case. But you have to admit it's certainly a lot more unified now than it was at any time during the 18th and 19th centuries, and it seems to me that the big turning point was the civil war. [i]That's[/i] all I was saying.

    [QUOTE][B]And yes that is just in considering white anglo saxon protestants. In fact if it wasnt for the senate this country would probably have broken up long ago. [/B][/QUOTE]

    I agree; the senate was a necessary part of holding this country together, particularly in the early days. But the senate's just a solution to the problem of getting the states to work together; the emotional core of unity couldn't come until thousands upon thousands had given their lives defining it.
  • E.TE.T Quote-o-matic
    [QUOTE][i]Originally posted by TheEXone [/i]
    [B]Europeans need to make sure that they are not guradualy brought in to a system that has little public accountability, and large centralized control.[/B][/QUOTE]
    That's the point
    This EU is just new capitalistic version of Soviet Union.
    I read last year that whole EU's bureaucrazy machine consist almost from 50 000 people.

    All power is centralized, Brussel have to agree everything and controls almost everything. (even without knowing nothing about local conditions, which is just copied directly from Soviet Union)

    Let's take wolfs for example, they have been killed from central Europe, so they are now EU's "holy cows", EU's laws protect them better than people.
    Here in eastern Finland wolfs are coming to frontyards and kill dogs all the time.
    Few years ago wolfpack killed twenty sheeps little over ten kms from where I live. (wolfs just keep killing them, even when they aren't hungry)
    In last year wolf was trying to take dog from one house doorsteps but dog owner noticed this and killed wolf with broomstick (or something similar).

    EDIT:
    This winter's count is 19 dogs, 6 calf and three sheeps in one province.


    So yeah, I wouldn't give damn if these brussels' bureaucrats would be layed to concrete and sinked to the Mariana trench.:angryv:
  • TyvarTyvar Next best thing to a St. Bernard
    [QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Bekenn [/i]
    [B]Never said otherwise. And spell my name right next time! [b][i]* FWAPP *[/i][/b]



    Once again, I didn't mean to suggest that that wasn't the case. But you have to admit it's certainly a lot more unified now than it was at any time during the 18th and 19th centuries, and it seems to me that the big turning point was the civil war. [i]That's[/i] all I was saying.



    I agree; the senate was a necessary part of holding this country together, particularly in the early days. But the senate's just a solution to the problem of getting the states to work together; the emotional core of unity couldn't come until thousands upon thousands had given their lives defining it. [/B][/QUOTE]

    The problem is with as devided as our political system is currently, hell as devided as the populace is on the issues we face today, were developing more fault lines.

    We are in essence seeing the formation of two different, and incompatable visions of what it means to be [I]an american[/I]
  • Maybe thats because somewhere along the way we stopped discussing what America is supposed to be, even when the last 50 years have changed dramaticaly the face of the country. The civil rights movement and leaders like MLK, and Kennedy where that last to realy instill in people a sense of who we are, and who we should become. Our leaders now just spend their time bickering over petty issues, and preserving the status quo, niether party has a real vision of what this country should stand for in the 21st century. Its the same in Europe too, politicians arguing over non-issues, and pantering to the wishes of large corporations, and interest groups. Add on top of that a media that seems to care more about 2 seconds of janet jacksons nipple, than the oppressed and starving people of the world, and you got one big mess.

    The people of Earth are on a speeding train heading to an unknown destination, with no conductor at the controls.
    Under those conditions fear, and uncertainty becomes dominant, and those who covet power are given the tools to dominate.

    Who are we?, and what do we want?, such simple questions no one is asking. If we would only seize this moment and take control of the future, the world of tommorow for all of us could be one of hope, and not of dispair.
  • BigglesBiggles <font color=#AAFFAA>The Man Without a Face</font>
    Absolutely.
  • TyvarTyvar Next best thing to a St. Bernard
    Actually, I diasgree Exone and biggles, at least in the united states, there are visions of where to go, what we want and who we are, there are [I]two different ones[/I] and they can not reconcile.

    Fundamentaly US politics can be described by a tension between two lines of thought, that of the moral perfectability of man kind school, shaped the by the Reussoian vision that man by nature is good, and it is society that corrupts him, And the other school which is the Hobbesian school in that man is inherently selfish and corrupt and it is only the rules imposed by society that allow him to flourish otherwise.

    Not even MLK and DEFINATLY not Kenndy imposed a sense of "americanism" to claim otherwise is a fallicy imposed by revisionist histories. Kennedy is an icon even though he had a presidency that only lasted three years before his death, and was filled with many failed policies. But because of a media created "romanticism" he became this larger then life figure.

    look at this conversation, look at the disagreements that are happing, it just illustrates what actually exists in broad scope in our society. The re-emergency of a factional america, but with strong centralizing influences being pushed out of a few centers. And frankly unless people realize that Oklahoma and the rest of the midwest states are going to have different policies and views of "appropriateness" compared to California and the New England states, we might be headed back for 1860.
  • I see those two paths as a result of the two world views you desribed, not as an actual effort to define America. You are basicly desribing realism vs. liberalism both of which have their limitations in desribing human behavior. We are niether inherently good, nor inherently evil. Some are born good, others with a propensity for bad, others learn kindness, or learn cruelty, and most others fall somewhere in between.

    When I used MLK and Kennedy as examples, I suggested they made people feel like they were a part of something greater then petty politics, that the future could be one of hope and optimism. Reagan also managed to do this in a way, but like you said it was the media that helped turn Kennedy into an icon. Its just a sense of things that we don't have today.

    My point is that we have no real dialouge, people just tout their particular ideas and ignore what the other is saying.That allows the divisions you desribed to grow. Its very ironic that both sides have seemed to miss the point of their own philosophy, conservatives are supposed to be against strong government, yet many support legislation that gives the federal governemnt powers that almost suppercede the constitution. Liberal are supposed to support the spread of democracy, yet they are completely against the liberation of Iraq.
    I don't think you can make the case that either side knows just what they want in the long run. They may have short tem cliche goals like "get bush out of office" or " win the war on terrorism", but when it comes to the big ideas both fall very short of what this country needs.
  • JackNJackN <font color=#99FF99>Lightwave Alien</font>
    Can you say...

    Revivied Roman Empire?

    :p
Sign In or Register to comment.